Skip to main content
Clujul Medical logoLink to Clujul Medical
. 2015 Jul 1;88(3):293–297. doi: 10.15386/cjmed-484

Dynamic perfusion assessment during perforator flap surgery: an up-to-date

MAXIMILIAN VLAD MUNTEAN 1, VALENTIN MUNTEAN 2, FILIP ARDELEAN 3,, ALEXANDRU GEORGESCU 3
PMCID: PMC4632885  PMID: 26609259

Abstract

Flap monitoring technology has progressed alongside flap design. The highly variable vascular anatomy and the complexity associated with modern perforator flaps demands dynamic, real-time, intraoperative information about the vessel location, perfusion patterns and flap physiology.

Although most surgeons still assess flap perfusion and viability based solely on clinical experience, studies have shown that results may be highly variable and often misleading. Poor judgment of intraoperative perfusion leads to major complications. Employing dynamic perfusion imaging during flap reconstruction has led to a reduced complication rate, lower morbidity, shorter hospital stay, and an overall better result.

With the emergence of multiple systems capable of intraoperative flap evaluation, the purpose of this article is to review the two systems that have been widely accepted and are currently used by plastic surgeons: Indocyanine green angiography (ICGA) and dynamic infrared thermography (DIRT).

Keywords: perforator flap, indocyanine green, thermography

Introduction

Perforator flaps represent the pinnacle of flap design. They are a result of decades of research pioneered by Manchot, Salmon, Cormack and Lamberty, and Taylor and Palmer [1], that have led to a better understanding of the vascular anatomy and physiology of the cutaneous circulation. This evolution has allowed surgeons to harvest flaps based on a single cutaneous perforator leading to reduced donor site morbidity, preservation of underlying structures and the ability to tailor any flap to match the exact defect requirements [2].

Flap monitoring technology has progressed alongside flap design. Preoperative imaging for perforator mapping is standard in some areas of reconstructive surgery, like breast reconstruction [39]. Preoperative imaging, using CTA or MRI, has the ability to create a vascular map of the flap but it fails to deliver dynamic, intraoperative information regarding the physiology and the perfusion pattern of certain vessels [10].

The virtually infinite number of potential donor sites, highly variable vascular anatomy and the complexity associated with dissecting increasingly smaller and more fragile blood vessels are the drawbacks of this evolutionary process [11]. The increased technical demands of these flaps have hailed the need for systems that provide dynamic, real-time, intraoperative information about vessel location, perfusion patterns and flap physiology [12].

The last decade has seen the emergence of multiple systems capable of intraoperative flap evaluation. The purpose of this article is to review the two systems that have been widely accepted and are currently used by plastic surgeons: Indocyanine green angiography (ICGA) and dynamic infrared thermography (DIRT).

Indocyanine Green Angiography (ICGA)

Indocyanine green was first discovered in 1957, and was initially used in ophthalmology to assess retinal vessels [13]. It’s introduction in plastic surgery is relatively recent. It is currently being used to monitor free and pedicle flaps, assess micro-vascular anastomosis, map perforators and evaluate burn depth [14].

The dye is injected in bolus trough a peripheral vein. Using an overhead laser (Pi =0.16W − λ=780 nm) the dye is excited and it emits fluorescence with a maximum at 835 nm. The images are visualized on a video monitor [12]. The light in the near infrared spectrum (NIR) is minimally absorbed by water and hemoglobin, and is not dispersed by the tissues. This allows for an excellent visualization of blood vessels up to 2 cm underneath the skin [15].

ICG binds to plasma proteins so it’s presence in the extravascular space is minimal. Unlike fluorescein, ICG does not cause tissues staining. The dye has a plasma half life of about 3–5 minutes in humans which allows for multiple injections during the same procedure, to a maximum dose of 5 mg/kgc [16]. After 10–20 seconds post-injection the dye appears in the arterioles of the flap, with a maximum fluorescence at 30 seconds [17]. Because ICG has a very rapid biliary excretion, the angiography can be repeated every 10 minutes [18].

The raw image is viewed as a gray scale, but software processing can be used to calculate florescence percentages [19]. ICGA can be used to monitor all types of flaps, including skin flaps, muscle, fascia and bone [17,20,21].

Perforator mapping

ICGA is used for perforator mapping in the preoperative stage. Unlike CTA it does not require ionizing radiation or a separate hospital visit [22]. Several authors reported using ICGA for perforator mapping and optimizing flap design [16]. Sacks et al. used ICGA to center the flap over the dominant perforator after anterior thigh mapping [23]. The authors concluded that ICGA is superior to Doppler in identifying the dominant perforator, alleviating the need for exploration of different perforators. This reduces operating time and donor site morbidity.

Onoda et al. reported using ICGA for perforator mapping, but found it useful only in flaps with a thickness of ≤2 cm [24]. In thicker flaps they observed a diffuse staining of the tissue after injecting the dye, with no clearly visible perforators. In sites with a thin layer of subcutaneous fat, like the head and neck region, the trunk, and the extremities, perforators and their course are easily visualized and ICGA is regularly used for flap planning and evaluation [25] as reported by Pestana et al.

Perfusion assessment

ICGA has been used to evaluate perfusion in ophthalmology [26], cardiac [27], vascular [28] and transplantation surgery [29]. It is successfully used by plastic surgeons to assess flap perfusion and guide resection of necrotic tissue [14,30,31].

Several authors have reported excellent results with intraoperative soft tissue perfusion evaluation using ICGA. Pestana et al. used fluorescence angiography to monitor perfusion in 29 patients with breast reconstruction. ICGA identified ischemic tissue and guided resection in 50% of patients, with one total flap loss correctly identified by the technique [17]. Holm et al. studied a group of 25 patients with breast reconstruction. They used fluorescence angiography to evaluate the vascular territories of bots SIEA and DIEA. ICGA changed the preoperative plan in 44% of patients [32].

Assessing perfusion by clinical judgment alone is extremely difficult even for experienced surgeons. Newman et al. used ICGA to monitor mastectomy flaps in 20 patients. The study showed a 95% correlation between intraoperative fluorescent angiography and clinical course with a 100% sensitivity and 91% specificity [33]. Phillips et al. found similar results in their study involving 32 mastectomy patients. ICGA had a 90% sensibility and 100% specificity in predicting mastectomy flap necrosis [34].

A meta-analysis published in 2014 by Lohman et al. evaluated a total of 11 articles from 9 lead authors describing intraoperative use of ICGA. A number of 244 patients and 253 flaps were analyzed. Calculated sensitivity was estimated at 90.9% (95% CI: 77.5Y100) with a P value for heterogeneity of 0.93 (Q=0.79), accuracy: 98.6% (95% CI: 97.6Y99.7), with a P value for heterogeneity of 0.77 (Q=5.75). Specificity was 98.6% (95% CI: 94.5Y99.8). The rate of re-exploration was 11.1% (95% CI: 7.4Y16.3), and intraoperative revision because of a positive ICGA study was 13.3% (95% CI: 9.1Y18.5). In 9 flaps the surgeon chose not to act in spite of anastomotic problems or filling defects revealed by ICGA. This resulted in 2 cases of complete flap loss, 6 partial and a complication rate of at least 89% [35].

Vascular anastomosis

Indocyanine green angiography is used to confirm the patency of micro-vascular anastomosis [20,36]. Once the anastomosis is completed, ICGA can evaluate flow through the pedicle. Fluorescence angiography can also differentiate between an arterial or venous thrombosis [12]. In case of an arterial occlusion, there is no visible dye in the flap. If there is a venous outflow problem, the dye does not exit the flap and the flap remains colored after the adjacent tissue has lost florescence [37]. This imaging test can also be used to assess venous drainage in perforator flaps and reveals the need for a second venous pathway.

ICGA provides real-time assessment of tissue perfusion that has been correlated with clinical outcomes [12] and guides surgical decision making, such as flap design, intraoperative tissue resection, and assessment of micro-vascular anastomois. ICG has an excellent safety profile (1 in 42.000 allergic reactions) and short plasma half-life, allowing for repeat evaluations during the same operative procedure.

Dynamic infrared thermography (DIRT)

Monitoring flaps using DIRT implies using an infrared camera, which generates a color-coded map based on the heat emitted by tissues. Warm areas appear red, while cold areas are shown in blue. As a result thermography can be used to assess flap vascularization. Areas with increased blood flow and ischemic areas easily differentiated.

In current clinical practice DIRT is used to map perforators, optimize flap design, assess blood flow and evaluate anastomosis patency [38]. Thermography is mainly used to monitor skin flaps but the technique can be applied to every type of flap [39].

Perforator mapping

Thermography visualizes perforators as areas of high temperature “hot spots” and allows them to be clearly differentiated from the surrounding tissue [40]. For perforator mapping the area of interest has to be cooled down first. This is achieved either by cold air, or a metal plate applied directly over the flap. After the area has cooled down, the thermography camera is used to visualize the rewarming pattern [41]. The first areas that rewarm are the perforators and appear as “hot spots”. The speed of rewarming and the progression of rewarming at the “hot spot” provides information regarding the caliber of the perforator and it’s surrounding vascular network [42]. De Weer et al. used DIRT for perforator mapping in 27 patients undergoing breast reconstruction. They concluded that preoperative thermography correctly identified the dominant perforator in all cases [43].

Perforators mapped using thermography overlap with those identified by Doppler ultrasound and correlate well with perforators on CTA. Giunta et al. showed that the Doppler signal recorded at skin level is situated at a mean distance of 0.8 cm from the actual fascial emergence of the perforator [44]. Septal perforators, which have a short course and follow a perpendicular direction towards the skin [45] are easily identified because they appear first and have the strongest signal.

Optimizing flap design

DIRT can be used to differentiate between direct and indirect connections between perforator angiosomes. True or direct connections between perforator angiosomes usually occur alongside venous or nervous pedicles [46]. These true connections are ideal because they permit harvesting multiple perforator angiosomes with a low risk of necrosis [47]. By identifying directly linked perforator angiosomes, DIRT is used for optimizing flap design. The flap is redrawn to encompass as many directly connected perforator angiosomes as possible [48]. This allows harvesting of bigger flaps and reduces complications.

Assessing flap flow and anastomosis patency

DIRT can monitor dynamic changes in flap perfusion. Visualization of “hot spots” in the perforator area of the harvested flap confirms the integrity of the vascular pedicle, after dissection of the perforator or after the flap has been inset at the level of the defect [43].

Dynamic thermography monitoring after de-clamping can differentiate between arterial or venous problems. If the flap temperature does not rise after the cold challenge, and there are no visible hot spots, there is a problem with the arterial inflow. If the flap is diffusely warm with no visible hotspots, there is a venous drainage insufficiency [39]. This allows the surgeon to reevaluate the flap pedicle prior to final closure.

Perforator flaps have a high risk of developing circulation problems during harvesting and flap inset [49]. The perforator pedicle doesn’t have a protective muscle cuff, making it more susceptible to injury or torsion. DIRT can identify external compression, kinking, vasospasm or venous insufficiency, altering the operative plan accordingly [50].

Dynamic infrared thermography can assess perfusion dynamics, map perforators, confirm pedicle patency and optimize flap design. It does not require intravenous contrast or ionizing radiation. It is a safe, noninvasive and without complications. The procedure can be repeated countless times in each patient.

Conclusion

Both ICGA and DIRT provide real time perfusion assessment, optimize flap design, allow perforator mapping and intraoperative flap monitoring. Published data confirm that these systems have a high sensitivity and specificity in facilitating flap planning, dissection and inset. Most surgeons still assess flap perfusion and viability based solely on clinical experience, which can often be misleading. Employing dynamic perfusion imaging during flap reconstruction has led to a reduced complication rate, lower morbidity, shorter hospital stay, and an overall better result. As the technology becomes more available in the near future, perfusion imaging will be a mandatory step in any reconstructive procedure.

Acknowledgement

This paper was published under the frame of European Social Found, Human Resources Development Operational Program 2007–2013, project no. POSDRU/159/1.5/136893.

References

  • 1.Taylor GI, Palmer JH. The vascular territories (angiosomes) of the body: experimental study and clinical applications. Br J Plast Surg. 1987;(40):113–141. doi: 10.1016/0007-1226(87)90185-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Saint-Cyr M, Schaverien MV, Rohrich RJ. Perforator flaps: history, controversies, physiology, anatomy, and use in reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009;123(4):132e–145e. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e31819f2c6a. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Nahabedian MY. Overview of perforator imaging and flap perfusion technologies. Clin Plast Surg. 2011;38(2):165–174. doi: 10.1016/j.cps.2011.03.005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Smit JM, Klein S, Werker PM. An overview of methods for vascular mapping in the planning of free flaps. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2010;63(9):e674–e682. doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2010.06.013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Mathes DW, Neligan PC. Current techniques in preoperative imaging for abdomen-based perforator flap microsurgical breast reconstruction. J Reconstr Microsurg. 2010;26(1):3–10. doi: 10.1055/s-0029-1244806. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Masia J, Clavero JA, Larrañaga J, Vives L, Pons G. Preoperative planning of the abdominal perforator flap with multidetector row computed tomography: 3 years of experience. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008;122(2):80e–81e. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e31817d5eea. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Rozen WM, Phillips TJ, Ashton MW, Stella DL, Gibson RN, Taylor GI. Preoperative imaging for DIEA perforator flaps: a comparative study of computed tomographic angiography and doppler ultrasound. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008;121(1 Suppl):1–8. doi: 10.1097/01.prs.0000293874.71269.c9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Rozen WM, Ashton MW, Stella DL, Phillips TJ, Grinsell D, Taylor GI. The accuracy of computed tomographic angiography for mapping the perforators of the deep inferior epigastric artery: a blinded, prospective cohort study. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008;122(4):1003–1009. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181845994. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Chernyak V, Rozenblit AM, Greenspun DT, Levine JL, Milikow DL, Chia FA, et al. Breast reconstruction with deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap: 3.0-T gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging for preoperative localization of abdominal wall perforators. Radiology. 2009;250(2):417–424. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2501080307. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Ensat F, Babl M, Conz C, Rueth MJ, Greindl M, Fichtl B, et al. The efficacy of color duplex sonography in preoperative assessment of anterolateral thigh flap. Microsurgery. 2012;32(8):605–610. doi: 10.1002/micr.20835. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Dancey A, Blondeel PN. Technical tips for safe perforator vessel dissection applicable to all perforator flaps. Clin Plast Surg. 2010;37(4):593–606. xi–vi. doi: 10.1016/j.cps.2010.06.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Gurtner GC, Jones GE, Neligan PC, Newman MI, Phillips BT, Sacks JM, et al. Intraoperative laser angiography using the SPY system: review of the literature and recommendations for use. Ann Surg Innov Res. 2013;7(1):1. doi: 10.1186/1750-1164-7-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Bischoff PM, Flower RW. Ten years experience with choroidal angiography using indocyanine green dye: a new routine examination or an epilogue? Doc Ophthalmol. 1985;60(3):235–291. doi: 10.1007/BF00157827. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Holm C, Tegeler J, Mayr M, Becker A, Pfeiffer UJ, Mühlbauer W. Monitoring free flaps using laser-induced fluorescence of indocyanine green: a preliminary experience. Microsurgery. 2002;22(7):278–287. doi: 10.1002/micr.10052. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Zenn MR. Fluorescent angiography. Clin Plast Surg. 2011;38(2):293–300. doi: 10.1016/j.cps.2011.03.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Azuma R, Morimoto Y, Masumoto K, Nambu M, Takikawa M, Yanagibayashi S, et al. Detection of skin perforators by indocyanine green fluorescence nearly infrared angiography. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008;122(4):1062–1067. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181858bd2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Pestana IA, Coan B, Erdmann D, Marcus J, Levin LS, Zenn MR. Early experience with fluorescent angiography in free-tissue transfer reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009;123(4):1239–1244. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e31819e67c1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Liu DZ, Mathes DW, Zenn MR, Neligan PC. The application of indocyanine green fluorescence angiography in plastic surgery. J Reconstr Microsurg. 2011;27(6):355–364. doi: 10.1055/s-0031-1281515. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Moyer HR, Losken A. Predicting mastectomy skin flap necrosis with indocyanine green angiography: the gray area defined. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2012;129(5):1043–1048. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e31824a2b02. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Holm C, Dornseifer U, Sturtz G, Ninkovic M. Sensitivity and specificity of ICG angiography in free flap reexploration. J Reconstr Microsurg. 2010;26(5):311–316. doi: 10.1055/s-0030-1249314. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Mothes H, Donicke T, Friedel R, Simon M, Markgraf E, Bach O. Indocyanine-green fluorescence video angiography used clinically to evaluate tissue perfusion in microsurgery. J Trauma. 2004;57(5):1018–1024. doi: 10.1097/01.ta.0000123041.47008.70. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Swanson EW, Hsu YC, Cheng HT. CTA and contrast-enhanced MRA are equally accurate for localizing deep inferior epigastric perforator flap arteries: a systematic review. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2015;68(4):580–581. doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2014.11.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Sacks JM, Nguyen AT, Broyles JM, Yu P, Valerio IL, Baumann DP. Near-infrared laser-assisted indocyanine green imaging for optimizing the design of the anterolateral thigh flap. Eplasty. 2012;12:e30. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Onoda S, Azumi S, Hasegawa K, Kimata Y. Preoperative identification of perforator vessels by combining MDCT, doppler flowmetry, and ICG fluorescent angiography. Microsurgery. 2013;33(4):265–269. doi: 10.1002/micr.22079. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Pestana IA, Zenn MR. Correlation between abdominal perforator vessels identified with preoperative CT angiography and intraoperative fluorescent angiography in the microsurgical breast reconstruction patient. Ann Plast Surg. 2014;72(6):S144–149. doi: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000000104. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Dzurinko VL, Gurwood AS, Price JR. Intravenous and indocyanine green angiography. Optometry. 2004;75(12):743–755. doi: 10.1016/s1529-1839(04)70234-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Desai ND, Miwa S, Kodama D, Koyama T, Cohen G, Pelletier MP, et al. A randomized comparison of intraoperative indocyanine green angiography and transit-time flow measurement to detect technical errors in coronary bypass grafts. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2006;132(3):585–594. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2005.09.061. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Kang Y, Lee J, Kwon K, Choi C. Dynamic fluorescence imaging of indocyanine green for reliable and sensitive diagnosis of peripheral vascular insufficiency. Microvasc Res. 2010;80(3):552–555. doi: 10.1016/j.mvr.2010.07.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Sekijima M, Tojimbara T, Sato S, Nakamura M, Kawase T, Kai K, et al. An intraoperative fluorescent imaging system in organ transplantation. Transplant Proc. 2004;36(7):2188–2190. doi: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2004.09.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Komorowska-Timek E, Gurtner GC. Intraoperative perfusion mapping with laser-assisted indocyanine green imaging can predict and prevent complications in immediate breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;125(4):1065–1073. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181d17f80. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Newman MI, Samson MC. The application of laser-assisted indocyanine green fluorescent dye angiography in microsurgical breast reconstruction. J Reconstr Microsurg. 2009;25(1):21–26. doi: 10.1055/s-0028-1090617. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Holm C, Mayr M, Höfter E, Raab N, Ninkovic M. Interindividual variability of the SIEA Angiosome: effects on operative strategies in breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008;122(6):1612–1620. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e31818a9a3f. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Newman MI, Jack MC, Samson MC. SPY-Q analysis toolkit values potentially predict mastectomy flap necrosis. Ann Plast Surg. 2013;70(5):595–598. doi: 10.1097/SAP.0b013e3182650b4e. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Phillips BT, Lanier ST, Conkling N, Wang ED, Dagum AB, Ganz JC, et al. Intraoperative perfusion techniques can accurately predict mastectomy skin flap necrosis in breast reconstruction: results of a prospective trial. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2012;129(5):778e–788e. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e31824a2ae8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Lohman RF, Ozturk CN, Ozturk C, Jayaprakash V, Djohan R. An Analysis of Current Techniques Used for Intraoperative Flap Evaluation. Ann Plast Surg. 2014 Jul 4; doi: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000000235. [Epub ahead of print] [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Yeoh MS, Kim DD, Ghali GE. Fluorescence angiography in the assessment of flap perfusion and vitality. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am. 2013;25(1):61–6. vi. doi: 10.1016/j.coms.2012.11.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Krishnan KG, Schackert G, Steinmeier R. The role of near-infrared angiography in the assessment of post-operative venous congestion in random pattern, pedicled island and free flaps. Br J Plast Surg. 2005;58(3):330–338. doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2004.10.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.de Weerd L, Mercer JB, Setsa LB. Intraoperative dynamic infrared thermography and free-flap surgery. Ann Plast Surg. 2006;57(3):279–284. doi: 10.1097/01.sap.0000218579.17185.c9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Tenorio X, Mahajan AL, Wettstein R, Harder Y, Pawlovski M, Pittet B. Early detection of flap failure using a new thermographic device. J Surg Res. 2009;151(1):15–21. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2008.03.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Salmi AM, Tukiainen E, Asko-Seljavaara S. Thermographic mapping of perforators and skin blood flow in the free transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous flap. Ann Plast Surg. 1995;35(2):159–164. doi: 10.1097/00000637-199508000-00008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Itoh Y, Arai K. Use of recovery-enhanced thermography to localize cutaneous perforators. Ann Plast Surg. 1995;34(5):507–511. doi: 10.1097/00000637-199505000-00009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.de Weerd L, Weum S, Mercer JB. The value of dynamic infrared thermography (DIRT) in perforatorselection and planning of free DIEP flaps. Ann Plast Surg. 2009;63(3):274–279. doi: 10.1097/SAP.0b013e3181b597d8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.de Weerd L, Mercer JB, Weum S. Dynamic infrared thermography. Clin Plast Surg. 2011;38(2):277–292. doi: 10.1016/j.cps.2011.03.013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Giunta RE, Geisweid A, Feller AM. The value of preoperative Doppler sonography for planning free perforator flaps. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2000;105(7):2381–2386. doi: 10.1097/00006534-200006000-00011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Blondeel PN. One hundred free DIEP flap breast reconstructions: a personal experience. Br J Plast Surg. 1999;52(2):104–111. doi: 10.1054/bjps.1998.3033. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Aoki S, Tanuma K, Iwakiri I, Mizuno H, Ogawa R, Ozawa H, et al. Clinical and vascular anatomical study of distally based sural flap. Ann Plast Surg. 2008;61(1):73–78. doi: 10.1097/SAP.0b013e318153f3da. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Saint-Cyr M. Assessing perforator architecture. Clin Plast Surg. 2011;38(2):175–202. doi: 10.1016/j.cps.2011.03.015. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Chubb DP, Taylor GI, Ashton MW. True and ‘choke’ anastomoses between perforator angiosomes: part II. dynamic thermographic identification. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013;132(6):1457–1464. doi: 10.1097/01.prs.0000434407.73390.82. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Wilson SB, Spence VA. Dynamic thermographic imaging method for quantifying dermal perfusion: potential and limitations. Med Biol Eng Comput. 1989;27(5):496–501. doi: 10.1007/BF02441468. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.de Weerd L, Miland AO, Mercer JB. Perfusion dynamics of free DIEP and SIEA flaps during the first postoperative week monitored with dynamic infrared thermography. Ann Plast Surg. 2009;62(1):42–47. doi: 10.1097/SAP.0b013e3181776374. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Clujul Medical are provided here courtesy of University of Medicine and Pharmacy of Cluj-Napoca, Romania

RESOURCES